Birmingham Post-Herald

Commentary
Birmingham Post-Herald

Last updated: June 11, 1999

The staff | Email Us | Important Numbers | About Us

Custom
listings!
Click here!

OUR VIEWS

Insurance plan is bad

When Tipper Gore preached at a White House conference this week that it's important to understand that mental illness is an illness like any other, she was repeating what millions of Americans have come to understand.

Not only have larger percentages of people than ever before sought help for their afflictions in recent years, the stigma that once attached to such maladies has been slowly but surely evaporating.

That's not to say that the conference was pointless. The vice president's wife has herself suffered from depression, and her public acknowledgment of the fact — along with other experiences related at the event — may help eradicate those prejudices about mental illness that yet persist. Additional enlightenment cannot hurt anyone.

What could hurt quite a few people, however, would be the enactment of a proposal that President Clinton chose the occasion to reiterate. He wants the federal government to mandate parity in health insurance coverage of mental and physical illnesses.

As is true of almost all Clinton proposals, this sounds good on the surface: Just make those big, bad insurance companies do what's right and everything will be OK. But even a bare-bones analysis shows this idea is a bad one.

If the insurance door were open to his list of mental-illness complaints — many of which are unverifiable through any physical evidence — insurance costs would increase by billions of dollars. Something, somewhere would have to give. In the end, more people might be hurt than helped.

The better answer is to do what many Republicans and some pundits suggest: Leave these issues to the states and to interactions between the insurance companies and their customers. If some of the states make mistakes one way or the other, the other states can learn from that.

By this method, Utopia may not arrive next week, but by this method, the evolution of a workable, sustainable system has a far better chance than under what Clinton envisions.

Next steps in Balkans

NATO, it appears, has imposed its will on Serbia, and over the next week or so allied peacekeepers will be moving into Kosovo as the Serb military pulls out. But NATO's problems in the Balkans are hardly over.

First, Slobodan Milosevic remains in power, although with a defeated and disgruntled army straggling home, the country's economic infrastructure in ruins and Serbia an international pariah, how much longer is anyone's guess.

If he follows a 10-year pattern, he will try to cling to power by causing trouble elsewhere, by harassing the peacekeepers or by trying to oust the democratically elected, pro-West government in Montenegro — along with Serbia, all that remains of the old Yugoslavia — or persecuting some other minority.

If harassed, NATO should strike back. If Milosevic attempts a coup in Montenegro, NATO should intervene. And the policy that no reconstruction aid goes to Serbia as long as Milosevic is in power should remain.

Second, NATO has assumed a heavy and long-term responsibility in Kosovo.

The first order is to ensure the refugees' quick and safe return. The sooner they go back, the sooner the rebuilding can begin and preparations be made for the harsh Balkan winter. And the sooner the refugees are allowed to go back, the more likely they are to do so. NATO did not fight the war to preside over a mass Kosovar diaspora.

The peacekeepers are also charged with protecting the Serbian "patrimony," the churches, shrines, monasteries and historic sites. It is a serious and important duty.

Balkan conflicts are characterized by each side trying to erase the other's culture. Vendettas become self-sustaining, and this one should stop here, which means containing the ethnic Albanians' counterproductive desire for revenge.

The Kosovo Liberation Army needs to be demilitarized and reconstituted as a lightly armed regular militia. Given what they've been through, it is asking too much for the Kosovars to wholly count on outsiders for their protection.

Still unsettled is the final status of Kosovo. NATO is committed to "autonomy," meaning Kosovo technically remains a Serbian province. The KLA is demanding full independence.

The key here is to postpone any decisions about Kosovo until it is restored as a fully functioning entity and then, under a vigilant international eye, to let Serbia and Kosovo sort out the problem themselves.

It is way too early to call Kosovo a victory, but the outlines are now in sight.

YOUR VIEWS

Can't ignore potential for violence

THE MAIL

As the one-month anniversary of the Colorado school shooting passed, we heard of a new shooting in Conyers, Ga., where six children were injured. This is not far from Birmingham, and many of our area high schools have been under siege with "copycat" bomb threats. We wring our hands in desperation trying to figure out "what we have done wrong," yet we ignore obvious ways to fix our mistakes.

The day after the Littleton, Colo., school shooting, Gov. Bill Owens emphatically stated that the male high school "killers" broke many of Colorado's "tough" gun laws. These "tough" laws forbid children to have guns, carry guns to school, and to conceal weapons — well, these are certainly powerful deterrents! Of course, Colorado does not have vigorous gun control.

Inundated with gory details of the shooting and identifying the boys as part of the "outsiders'" Trenchcoat Mafia, the media proceeds to analyze, comment, speculate and blame the school, parents, laws and Internet informational access for this tragedy. President Clinton said that this tragic incident should wake up America to the reality of school violence.

It was ironic that juxtaposed to the acute, in-depth coverage of this school assault, the relentless bombing of Yugoslavia was reported along with President Slobodan Milosevic's continued expulsion of the ethic Albanians from Kosovo. As the world's men leaders torment and kill hundreds of people in the name of justice, the two dead boys of Littleton are portrayed in the language of demonized deviant criminals. And our legislators pass "youth criminal justice" laws daily to punish children for mirroring our intolerant, sexist, racist and violent society.

These two boys apparently hated athletes because they were arrogant bullies who seem to have everything, and in the Nazi tradition of intolerance for differences, they detested African-Americans and Hispanics. However, their rage knew no bounds, and they killed indiscriminately.

Amazingly, their views and actions imitate international violence as NATO and the Serbs fight and murder for similar reasons in the name of "war" — justifiable carnage and destruction. The fact that these boys attacked their school on Hitler's birthday reminds us that we are a global community. Therefore, leaders everywhere are responsible to all the children of the world.

Alabama is not known for an attitude of tolerance, and in our hunting and macho-male football culture, little boys are encouraged to kill animals and hurt other human beings in the name of "sport." We have already experienced youths killing each other, and adolescent boys killing a father, his female friend and her two little girls. Must we wait until one of Alabama's angry teenage boys, who has learned from our violent culture that aggression is an appropriate way to solve problems, shoots up his high school before we wake up? The people of Alabama need to realize that traditional attitudes that encourage violence coupled with neglectful public polices that ignore the welfare of our children, families, and especially single mothers are time bombs just waiting to explode.

Linda Mancillas-Patterson
3543 Rockhill Road

Wasteful schools

How do we protect our children in school? Well, if the lottery passes, we can use money to put in metal detectors and security for our children. People will gamble, if not here, somewhere else. Let our kids get a good education and be protected by the money we spend in other states. It's worth it to me for my little girl to go to school and me not have to worry.

I worked at a school system a few years, and let me tell you, it is very sad what your tax money goes for. I worked in the lunchroom, and before I came the lunchroom managers did the menus and basic lunchroom work. Right after I came, the county came up with this great idea to hire three or four ladies to be over the lunchroom managers, to write the menus and take half the things your kids were eating away from them. Kids couldn't have salt anymore — after they had been through grammar school, middle school and some almost through high school. If they didn't want kids eating salt, they should have started that in grammar school. They changed shortening rolls into applesauce rolls that tasted so bad that the kids would not eat them.

You go to your child's school at the end of a lunch period and see where the food you buy goes. It goes in the garbage or, if the school is lucky and has an up-to-date kitchen, it will go down the drain. It's sad how much food is wasted. The children have to choose so many different things or they are sent back and made to put it on the plate whether they eat it or not.

You know why we don't have money for our schools? Start paying more attention to what your kids are doing at school. Go have lunch with your kids at school one day and see if you could eat it. See what your area managers are doing and what their job titles include and request to see how much salary they get. I bet you would be pretty surprised. But then again, if you're like me, nothing would surprise you.

Debbie Moreland
P.O. Box 275
Wilton

Experience 30 years ago offers one solution to school violence

Violence in schools is nothing new. Even in Montgomery, a very conservative, religious town, there is a long, unspoken history of school violence. The Columbine and Heritage High School shootings bring back memories of when I was ostracized and victimized while a student at Cloverdale Junior and Sidney Lanier High Schools. Although these attacks occurred more than 30 years ago, others might learn from them.

The attacks always began with verbal abuse, taunting and teasing. Nasty insults were slung at me by hate-enraged students. I was attacked on the schoolplayground by a student welding a baseball bat; I escaped a beating only because of my superior sprinting abilities. On another occasion I was assaulted on a school bus by a student armed with a large pocket knife which I was able to grapple from him before being stabbed. On a third occasion I was bloodied when an older, bigger student slugged me in the face — his weapon being a large metal skeleton ring.

These attacks were not motivated by anything I did. They were the result of my being labeled an outsider, a military kid, who stood his moral ground and refused to accept the prejudice and hatred that motivated others who believed, as did their popular governor, George C. Wallace, in "segregation forever." At the time these attacks occurred teachers and principals did little to stop the taunting, teasing and violence because they themselves did not want to see public schools integrated.

Now, ironically, many of those same hate-hardened students are parents who wonder why there is so much violence in our society and schools.

How I chose to respond to violence might help some parents and students dealing with school violence today. Rather than respond by bringing a gun to school and lashing back with bullets, I resolved to fight back with only words, with intelligence and skill. I made it my goal to become smarter, brighter and wiser than those students who attacked me.

As a result I achieved higher grades in math and science, bringing recognition to my school. Students, teachers, parents and principles who are looking for solutions to violence in their schools, may want to consider the merit of motivating and rewarding high academic achievement. If students who are being outcast and ostracized are shown that they can fight back using their minds instead of guns, then tragedies like the shootings at Columbine and Heritage high schools might be avoided!

Terry Lynch
P.O. Box 241035
Montgomery

Don't get it

With all due respect to the voluminus, detailed, expert and "u-name-itological" causal relationships touted about by our learned government leaders and all-knowing "liberapress" in an attempt to so eloquently and precisely make clear to "we others" the reason for teenage violence, it appears they just don't get it.

"We others" believe that it really doesn't take rocket science to see that we simply reap what we sow. It seems to "we others" that too many kids are simply spoiled brats who have been showered from birth with everything they ever wanted. In early childhood, they likely resorted to temper tantrums to successfully get their way — and today resort to the ultimate childish teenage temper tantrum of violence. As parents, instead of "locking up" the guns, we might consider "locking up" the BMWs and open-ended credit cards, and at an early age, begin developing in the child, the antithesis of that violence conducive "spoiled" character trait. Yes, "responsibility" is that trait. The trait, the importance of which we'd rather minimize in favor of pointing a finger at any and all things inanimate. Could it be that we parents don't have character enough to instill it? Instead of "metal" detectors in schools, we need "brat" detectors on our front doors.

Armond "Si" Simmons
104 Wadsworth Lane
Pell City

OTHER VIEWS

Winner seems to be Milosevic, not NATO

By Holger Jensen
Scripps Howard News Service

With a Kosovo peace plan finally signed by Yugoslavian generals and NATO about to stop its bombing, the question must now be asked: Who won?

The answer, at first glance, would appear to be Slobodan Milosevic.

Although the Western powers portray his capitulation as total victory, they actually made more concessions than the Yugoslavian president, who gave in to only one of NATO's demands.

That will allow him to keep only a few hundred Serbian troops in Kosovo, not the 15,000 he wanted.

However, to get that one concession, the NATO powers made five that amount to a major climb-down from their take-it-or-leave-it ultimatum issued at Rambouillet, France.

The five are:

Serbian troops will be given 11 days to leave Kosovo, not the seven days NATO had originally demanded. This is not a major concession but does give the departing Serbs more time to exact reprisals against Albanian Kosovars.

The international peacekeeping force known as Kosovo Force can be deployed only in Kosovo.

This is a major concession and a major departure from the Rambouillet plan, which insisted that NATO troops have "unimpeded access throughout the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia."

Among other things, it will prevent the arrest and trial of Milosevic.

KFOR will be under United Nations, not NATO, command with a Russian component protecting Serbian interests. The Russians, Milosevic's allies throughout the war, are not likely to be trusted by Albanian Kosovars.

The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, not NATO, will supervise the return of refugees, another watering down of the Rambouillet plan.

By far the biggest concession made by NATO powers is that they have dropped the original American demand for a referendum to determine Kosovo's future po.

The referendum was a key element of the Rambouillet plan, since it held out the promise of independence after a three-year interim period.

It was the only reason most guerrilla leaders of the Kosovo Liberation Army, though not all of them, signed on to Rambouillet.

Elimination of this political solution and the West's reaffirmation of Serbian sovereignty may convince the KLA to keep fighting, not just the Serbs but also Russian peacekeepers and NATO if KFOR tries to disarm the rebels.

Milosevic would take great delight in saying: "See, I told you so. They're nothing but a bunch of terrorists."

Many analysts say Milosevic is walking away with a better deal than the one he rejected at Rambouillet. And they point out that if NATO had been willing to make these concessions then, before the bombing began, agreement could have been achieved without the devastation of Yugoslavia and the escalation of "ethnic cleansing" it brought about in Kosovo.

Kim Holmes, vice president of the conservative Heritage Foundation, asks the question on everybody's lips: Will this peace agreement have any moral authority, particularly with the Albanian Kosovars, if it confirms the legitimacy of Milosevic's rule? The answer is no.

In Holmes' view, "the United States is now faced with the thankless task of deploying thousands of troops more or less indefinitely to preserve what can at best be a shaky peace. What's more, NATO has been transformed into a police force for the Balkans.

"And it will undoubtedly cost Americans and Europeans billions in foreign aid to help rebuild what NATO has partly destroyed. All in all, a steep price for such meager gains."

The greening of communities

By Will Rogers and Jim Chaffin
Scripps Howard News Service

While federal political leaders debate the appropriateness of a national battle against sprawl, Jacksonville, Fla., Mayor John Delaney is preparing to spend more than $300 million over the next five years to preserve land, enhance parks and increase public access to nature.

Delaney said Jacksonville's program is not just for traditional parks for his city of 635,000 people, but that it is part of a thoughtfully designed effort to guide growth into appropriate areas, reduce infrastructure costs and preserve the quality of life on which its economic future depends.

Between 10 and 20 square miles of land — approximately 10 percent of Jacksonville's remaining developable property, are slated for protection. Some of this acreage would be purchased outright, while conservation easements will protect other land from development. Interestingly, this substantial spending proposal is coming from a fiscally conservative Republican who has cut property taxes four times in as many years.

Jacksonville is one of a growing number of communities using land conservation to manage development as part of an overall smart-growth strategy. Around the country, growth is being used as an opportunity to protect the environment, enhance the economy and support community values.

Those efforts reflect a diverse range of communities.

People in core urban areas and inner-ring suburbs are creating parks and greenways to attract businesses, residents and investment. On the fast-growing suburban fringe, residents are setting aside vital landscapes to preserve the character of their communities.

Citizens in both rural and urban areas are recognizing the importance of protecting farmland. And communities in outlying areas threatened by second-home development are setting aside scenic lands that support tourism and preserve the open space resources that characterize a rural community.

Land conservation, not heretofore used as a tool to guide land development, is suddenly acquiring new utility in the smart-growth toolbox.

One reason for this new interest is that communities are recognizing that purchasing land or development rights is the only way to protect the best landscapes and ensure that the public does not end up with the developers' leftovers.

These lands might be thought of as the "green infrastructure" of the community and could include watersheds, parks and areas that preserve both historic resources and community character — lands that enhance quality of life and reflect a community's long-term values.

In addition, because land conservation is a marketplace tool and inherently fair to landowners, it is widely accepted across the political spectrum.

Land conservation both complements and offers an alternative to regulation. It may also help avoid wasteful legal and political battles based on landowners' charges that they are not being fairly compensated for the benefits that land protection brings to a community.

Because of the burgeoning interest in smart-growth strategies, funding for land protection is increasing across the nation. In November 1998, voters approved $7.5 billion in new state and local conservation spending, in part, to gain control over how their communities will grow.

On the federal level, both the Clinton administration and Congress have followed the lead of voters by proposing increased expenditures from the Land and Water Conservation Fund, including revival of the long-dormant state and local funding program.

The best of these proposals include incentives to encourage local fund-raising efforts and conservation plans that will not only preserve land, but will also protect water, air and endangered species. This money is being leveraged up and down the chain of government.

New Jersey voters made news in November by approving $100 million per year in new state land conservation spending over the next decade.

Less widely known is the fact that New Jersey will broaden the impact of those funds through its matching grants program. In part because of the availability of those matching funds, 16 out of 21 of this state's counties and dozens of municipalities have already instituted dedicated sources of open-space funding. That money already exceeds $100 million a year.

Now communities have the opportunity to use land conservation as part of a comprehensive strategy to meet larger community goals. Those include guiding growth, rejuvenating urban neighborhoods, conserving watersheds and protecting essential ecosystems.

That is already happening in California's booming San Diego County. After decades of squabbling over how to protect endangered species in the path of development, local, state and federal officials are working with landowners and conservation groups on a regional system of habitat reserves while easing development constraints on less-sensitive land.

Under the auspices of California's Natural Communities Conservation Program, more than a dozen properties have been acquired to fill out what might be considered a "greenprint for growth" in San Diego County. Those lands may also offer recreation opportunities for the county's burgeoning population.

While the jury is still out on whether that program alone can ultimately protect endangered species in San Diego County, the effort is a national model for how public-private partnerships can direct development to the most appropriate areas and away from the most sensitive ones.

Austin, Texas, is another community that is using land conservation as part of a comprehensive effort to plan for growth. Over the last decade, residents have approved more than $87 million in local bonds to help create parks and greenways and protect local watershed lands.

In an innovative effort, the money is also being used to protect stream corridors and hillsides while ensuring livability throughout a 5,000-acre "desired development zone" where the city aims to guide growth.

Those programs seem to work because the community — where the negative impact of growth is most keenly felt — is in control of the conservation.

LOOK BACK

From the files of the Birmingham Post-Herald:

50 years ago, June 11, 1949

Doctors at American Medical Association meeting in Atlantic City, N.J., learn to use sandpaper and electric sander to remove smallpox blemishes and tattoo marks.

Robert R. Davis, employee of University of California's radiation laboratory researching atomic bombs until April 1943, testifies before House Un-American Activities Committee that he was recruited into Communist Party in 1942.

25 years ago, June 11, 1974

University of Alabama at Birmingham awards honorary doctor of literature degree to Birmingham News publisher Clarence Hanson Jr.

Top of page If you have problems with this or any other page, please contact the Birmingham Post-Herald webmaster.

Copyright (c) 1999 Birmingham Post Co. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission from the editor is prohibited.